FDR Hearing

[LondonDrums]

Hi All,
After spending over £6000 on solicitors fees, I've now run out of funds for my legal representation for divorce proceedings and am now self representing.
I have an FDR hearing very soon and after exchanging two sets of offers I've been told by my wife's solicitor in writing that if I don't accept an offer of 50/50 split of equity on selling the family home, if the judge in the FDR or Final hearing agrees with this equity split, they will come after me for my wife's legal fees which they estimate to total £10k.
Appreciate this is not a legal advice forum but if anyone has any past experience that they could point to, I'd be so grateful.
I currently reside in the family home and have our two children (5 and 9) somewhere between 60% and 65% of the nights of the year.
I have asked for 75% equity because the likely equity is £100k - after my marital debts have been paid, if I get 50%, after estate agents fees, I'd be lucky to be left with £10k. I am not in a position to buy her out as my income is not high enough due to being self-employed to work around school hours (which was the case before we separated as her job took her away from home Mon - Fri)
Just after we separated, her mother died and she has indicated she will inherit £200k. One way of her getting this is to raise a mortgage on her late mothers home to buy her sibling out - so needs a mortgage of £100k. but needs me to sell family home to do this. I've said I'll do that to allow her to do this but on the basis I take 75% of the equity so that I could potentially buy again as I will have to rent upon selling - while she will have a mortgage half the monthly amount of my likely rental. She has always had the child benefit money.
Am i taking a huge risk in not accepting this offer of 50/50 and proceeding to the FDR hearing (and self representing) and likely to end up paying her legal costs and in effect end up with nothing after the house is sold?
Any advice would be gratefully received.

It’s always risky when going to fdr

and without knowing the facts of the case it’s difficult to advuse. 75% seems high but there may be other assets actually ? (Pensions?)

in general you may have a stronger case if you’re lower earner and have children more.

but that will friend on both your earnings, ( assessed in full time income), whether one has greater needs than the other.

her inheritance may be important if that’s akready due because she’d need less of the marital assets to provide for her needs.

its likely you’re in a fairly strong position but I’d advise spending lots of money arguing over 10-20k. And a court can award costs to the other dude if it’s deemed appropriate.

courts also don’t necessarily care if you can mortgage and buy - they just want provision that both parties can house the children.

We don’t know if it is a bluff or not. They are saying your refusal to settle is completely unreasonable and they have a case to ask for you to cover costs. If you spent 6k on legal advice, you should know if this is the case or not. “I don’t want to rent” is not a need. It won’t increase your share of what is a small pot of equity. The circumstances under which you chose to be self employed have changed. You need to look at how you can improve your income and co parenting can facilitate this. These are areas where you seem unreasonable.

In terms of what you could use to push back is that you need more than 50% to meet your housing needs. And, that your ex has a significant inheritance that will ensure she is adequately housed.

thanks for both your responses - much appreciated.

yes, her inheritance is due - probate was issued over a year ago.
I'm quite happy to rent, I just feel that given her level of inheritance and that she needs the FMH sold to get a mortgage, then asking for more equity (20 to 25k) isn't that unreasonable but maybe it is.
I'd read that it's only if in the final hearing the judge awards the same as their offer that they can come after me for costs and not at offer stage and FDR - if it is FDR as well that maybe I should accept -
I have managed to increase my self employed income since we separated but need more years accounts for mortage and for credit file issues due to marital debts to be older to get mortgage.

You could argue back that you’ll ask for the inheritance to be included in pot for sharing. Either way her needs if the marital assets are less as she has this other asset

Her solicitors are right. You're being greedy. There's no reason why you'd get more tbh an 50% and if you don't take the offer, it goes to final hearing and the judge awards 50/50, you'll be liable for her fees.

That’s not correct. Op may well get more than 50% even more so considering the inheritance and if they are lower earner.

of course we don’t know all the facts but there may be a case.

and women on here who want more than 50% are always told to go for it, even when it’s short marriage and all wealth is from before they met their husband

op needs to balance out chance of success in getting more than 50%, what that is in money terms ( 20k) and whether it’s worth the risk

definitely worth a counter argument to bring the inheritance in